Model-free and Vision-based Contact Force Control of Interventional Catheters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Catheter-tissue contact force(CF) has been reported as one of the success factors of heart ablation surgery. Monitoring and controlling the CF are challenging processes due to the limitation of sensing technologies and robotic surgery systems. In the present study, an image-based and sensor-less CF controller system is proposed that benefits from a neural force feedback estimator. Firstly, a real-time and accurate force feedback element was designed and evaluated to estimate the CF directly from the image of the ablation catheter’s deflections during the surgery. This learning-based force estimator successfully could provide CF with a mean absolute error of 0.012 ± 0.01 N and it was implemented in a closed-loop controller as a feedback element. Then, an experimental setup including the ablation catheter manipulator mechanism and a camera was designed to evaluate the performance of the CF controller for static and dynamic input CFs. The evaluation tests showed that the system can maintain the CF with root-mean-squared(RMS) error of 0.01 ± 0.01 N for static test and RMS error of 0.04 ± 0.03 N for a dynamic input force.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".